P. v. Rueda
Filed 10/10/06 P. v. Rueda CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SOSIMO HUGO RUEDA, Defendant and Appellant. | E039660 (Super.Ct.No. FSB052700) OPINION |
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Michael A. Smith, Judge. Affirmed.
Cynthia M. Sorman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant pled guilty to unlawfully taking/driving a vehicle. (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd.(a).) He was granted probation, which had been agreed-upon as part of his plea bargain. Also as part of that bargain, he waived his right to appeal. There is no certificate of probable cause in the record before this court.
Defendant appealed, and upon his request this court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel has filed a brief under the authority of People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493] setting forth a statement of the case, a summary of the facts, and potential arguable issues and requesting this court to undertake a review of the entire record.
We offered the defendant an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which he has not done.
We have now concluded our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
RAMIREZ
P.J.
We concur:
HOLLENHORST
J.
McKINSTER
J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Property line attorney.
